1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. Of the instant lawsuit, the four major lecture projects are conducted on the land indicated in the attached Table 1 list to the Plaintiff.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the first instance, except where "Plaintiff" is deemed "Plaintiff (previous trade name: Central Company Co., Ltd.)" as "the plaintiff (previous trade name): therefore, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff paid the unpaid balance of dredging soil purchase by B, and obtained approval of the business performance guarantee from the Chungcheong City. The plaintiff lawfully acquired the right to operate the storage of this case.

Nevertheless, as the Defendant interferes with the Plaintiff’s exercise of rights by denying the Plaintiff’s right to operate the instant storage yard, it is sought to verify the Plaintiff that the Defendant has the right to operate the said storage yard, and seek to collect and collect the items listed in the attached Table 4 from the land listed in the attached Table 1 as it interferes with the work of selecting or removing dredging soil and gravel on the land.

(The Plaintiff is the operating authority of the instant storage yard and is the owner of the dredging soil in the said storage yard, and the Defendant, without any authority, has extracted the dredging soil and removed equipment, etc. for the above extraction and removal on each of the instant land. As such, the Defendant must deliver to the Plaintiff each of the goods listed in the separate sheet Nos. 2 and 3 and the relevant part of the land, and deliver each of the land listed in the separate sheet No. 4 to the Plaintiff after collecting the goods listed in the separate sheet No. 4.

(Preliminary argument). (b)

In the situation where B, who had lawfully operated the storage place in accordance with the contract for operation of the storage place in this case, was paid 80,000,000 won out of the purchase price of dredging land, the Defendant demanded to reduce the purchase and sale balance of dredging soil against Chungcheongnam-si on the ground that “a significant portion of dredging soil falls under sand,” etc., and the staff in charge of Chungcheong-si also demand a reduction in the purchase and sale balance of dredging soil.